Column of mine published in January 2008.
RUN FOR YOUR MONEY ---- WHERE?
The other day an old friend called. We had been in the Navy together and continue to share a jaundiced view of the powers that be. He asked me how safe he should feel with all his money, hopefully enough to get him out of this life - dead, resting in a variety of accounts at Merrill Lynch, the humongous investment and brokerage house. I snorted, not in derision but because I was in the same boat, along with all the rest of us, unless you are sleeping on a mattress of gold bars.
All of us, rich, comfortable, stretched or poor are caught in a pickle. Our financial underpinnings are less than what we assumed they were, less than what we have taken for granted, at least going back to 1933. Since 1933 there has not been a vision of a financial abyss such is now hovering on the horizon.
In March of 1933, a different time in every way, except for greed and other unpleasant hard wired human traits, President Roosevelt shut the nations banks for a four day "holiday," in order to calm the population and slow the drainage of cash and gold that people wanted back under their mattresses. The government was able to shore up the financial system, ease the panic and put in place the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), that insures, by the government, bank deposits, in member banks, for up to a total of $2,500 in 1934 and $100,000 today with an additional $250,000 coverage on Individual Retirement accounts (IRA). A lot of money in those days and still a big deal today.
Over the past several months Merrill Lynch, Citigroup, Bank of America and innumerable investment houses, mutual funds and even the sacrosanct treasury of the great state of Maine have literally had the hubristic stuffing plucked out of their over inflated mattresses. Racing for fat returns they all drank their own bath water either packaging for resale, buying, or both, rafts of mortgage obligations, from "sub prime" borrowers. Many who had little hope of ever paying them off.
Insurance funds that were supposed to cover the failures are proving insufficient to cover the mess and as these rock solid piggy banks have had to show their losses they have been scrambling all over the world to raise capital by selling steeply discounted stock to deep pockets. The majority of the new investors are sovereign funds of various countries who are floating on trillions of petro and lead toy generated dollars. In short the dollars that we profligate citizens have shipped overseas are now coming back to buy our banking assets that rest on collapsing pillars of probity.
Needless to say the dollar also has tumbled in value. To the extent if your retirement money is in Treasury Bills, the assumed safest of the safe, though you will get your money back with interest it will be worth substantially less than when you put it in safekeeping. Maybe way less.
So what to do?
Run to the bank and yell give me my money? Forget it, they cannot print the stuff fast enough. Look to a stimulus package? How funny, in other words send more depreciated dollars to the citizens and urge them to blow it at the mall all in the hope of holding off an inevitable shattering correction.
Am I an alarmist? To a degree, probably, but face it we have been living way beyond our means. Stories in the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times and the Economist point out that the country has taken bigger hits in the past and that we are a $ 13 trillion economy. So what does it matter if we take a mere $700 billion hit on the mortgage trash.
But, but, but — if this mess spreads to all other parts of the debt economy, credit cards, home equity, retail sales, etc., as I am convinced it will, we could end up realizing that we are all living on the San Andreas fault of a shaky global economy.
What did this? The nasty greedy corporations? Please, we all did it. We want, and our politicians, of all stripes, want us to be happy so they feed our wants. Meanwhile we cannot even fill the infrastructure jobs that the 12 million illegal immigrants fill. Not because we can’t, but because we view such employment with disdain. Who wants to work as a busboy when they can sit at the table? Who wants to have their kids educated until they are stuffed with knowledge on physics and engineering and math when it is a free ride and easier to take a bogus course in "lifeology."
The piper will be paid.
Saturday, September 13, 2008
Our future-------
This week we learned that President Bush has authorized cross border attacks, by ground forces in Afghanistan, on Pakistani tribal retreats from where the Taliban launches attacks on NATO forces in Afghanistan. The Pakistani government has wailed over our ignoring their sovereignty but unless those enclaves are thrashed our hopes of eliminating this terrorist base their infrastructure could take over Pakistan along with it’s nuclear weapons and know how.
Meanwhile, Russia, with foreign investors bailing out, has pulled back from forward checkpoints in Georgia, one of it’s breakaway republics. This, even after Vice President Cheney, as Bush emissary, pledged $ 1 billion of our money to rebuild that befuddled country, after it was appropriately thrashed and trashed by Russian forces, who were responding to Georgia’s full scale attack on it’s own breakaway province of South Ossetia.
On a muggy, overcast day in Maine I am reviewing video clips on the web of the scenes in Galveston and Houston that have also been thrashed by Hurricane Ike while also following the news reports of top level meetings aimed to still the economic hurricane that is thrashing our financial and banking system.
Finally, I have watched with interest and no small dismay the ABC interviews of Governor Sarah Palin, the Republican candidate for Vice President, by Charles Gibson, that networks lead talking head. I was and am dismayed.
Dismayed by Gibson’s prosecutorial and churlish tone and Ms. Palin’s obvious lack of background. Having once been in such a situation I regret the need for her or anyone to be placed in a position subject to a talking heads interrogation that are then distorted by the network edits.
Needless to say she could have avoided such treatment simply by refusing Senator McCain’s offer to join his ticket. After she accepted the interview entertainment, instead of the Republican minders trying to cram everything that there is to know about everything into her head over a week they should have trained her to answer fire with fire.
No one, including Bill or Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama or John McCain can or should be expected to give a discourse, in detail, in under twenty seconds a question, on any of the key points challenging our country and the world. No one can provide clear steps to just address the few points I have listed at the intro to this blog, let alone provide a running, real time analysis of how to cure the worlds ills and uncertainty.
Ms. Palin however, did not chose to do that and her vulnerability came through. Her understanding of what the Bush doctrine was, or is, demonstrated lack of depth. Her statements about stem cell research demonstrated that she really had no idea what stem cell research is.
Her stated beliefs that she and McCain can make a dent in our entitlement mess by bringing efficiencies to government agencies is a hopeless concept.
But why do I focus on her a mear potential vice president? She is absolutely correct that others who have come to that office never had met a head of state before and yes, I do not think that such an accomplishment is a qualification for anyone. However, I am two months older than John McCain and if, like the old cliche, she is one heartbeat away from being president, I am dismayed. Her lack of background and core beliefs that are based on a depth of religious surety, that we have seen having great effect on the reasoning of George Bush, magnifies my concerns.
Meanwhile Obama squirms and Biden is lost and alone, somewhere out in America. Obama all ready has given answers to all of the questions that someone like Charles Gibson will ask (Gibson and Stephonopolous once probed Obama about a flag pin in his lapel.) and it will sound like beautiful music. But, if he actually tries even half of what he may at any given time espouse (it changes) he will not be leading a nationwide sing along.
So, our future is cluttered. Problems are building, problems are escalating and there is no leeway for frivolous as usual.
Our future is grim!
Meanwhile, Russia, with foreign investors bailing out, has pulled back from forward checkpoints in Georgia, one of it’s breakaway republics. This, even after Vice President Cheney, as Bush emissary, pledged $ 1 billion of our money to rebuild that befuddled country, after it was appropriately thrashed and trashed by Russian forces, who were responding to Georgia’s full scale attack on it’s own breakaway province of South Ossetia.
On a muggy, overcast day in Maine I am reviewing video clips on the web of the scenes in Galveston and Houston that have also been thrashed by Hurricane Ike while also following the news reports of top level meetings aimed to still the economic hurricane that is thrashing our financial and banking system.
Finally, I have watched with interest and no small dismay the ABC interviews of Governor Sarah Palin, the Republican candidate for Vice President, by Charles Gibson, that networks lead talking head. I was and am dismayed.
Dismayed by Gibson’s prosecutorial and churlish tone and Ms. Palin’s obvious lack of background. Having once been in such a situation I regret the need for her or anyone to be placed in a position subject to a talking heads interrogation that are then distorted by the network edits.
Needless to say she could have avoided such treatment simply by refusing Senator McCain’s offer to join his ticket. After she accepted the interview entertainment, instead of the Republican minders trying to cram everything that there is to know about everything into her head over a week they should have trained her to answer fire with fire.
No one, including Bill or Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama or John McCain can or should be expected to give a discourse, in detail, in under twenty seconds a question, on any of the key points challenging our country and the world. No one can provide clear steps to just address the few points I have listed at the intro to this blog, let alone provide a running, real time analysis of how to cure the worlds ills and uncertainty.
Ms. Palin however, did not chose to do that and her vulnerability came through. Her understanding of what the Bush doctrine was, or is, demonstrated lack of depth. Her statements about stem cell research demonstrated that she really had no idea what stem cell research is.
Her stated beliefs that she and McCain can make a dent in our entitlement mess by bringing efficiencies to government agencies is a hopeless concept.
But why do I focus on her a mear potential vice president? She is absolutely correct that others who have come to that office never had met a head of state before and yes, I do not think that such an accomplishment is a qualification for anyone. However, I am two months older than John McCain and if, like the old cliche, she is one heartbeat away from being president, I am dismayed. Her lack of background and core beliefs that are based on a depth of religious surety, that we have seen having great effect on the reasoning of George Bush, magnifies my concerns.
Meanwhile Obama squirms and Biden is lost and alone, somewhere out in America. Obama all ready has given answers to all of the questions that someone like Charles Gibson will ask (Gibson and Stephonopolous once probed Obama about a flag pin in his lapel.) and it will sound like beautiful music. But, if he actually tries even half of what he may at any given time espouse (it changes) he will not be leading a nationwide sing along.
So, our future is cluttered. Problems are building, problems are escalating and there is no leeway for frivolous as usual.
Our future is grim!
Tuesday, September 9, 2008
Capitalism, free enterprise and common sense
In a Republican administration that prides itself on global and market economies, the government has, in the last two years, stepped in to tweak the system. It has taken control of the side flippers on the pinball machine of economic well being and is trying to prevent a world wide economic tilt and I wish them well.
At the same time I think the whole mess deserves serious thought by the general public. Unfortunately this is wishful thinking.
Our economy, which the Democrats try to lay at the feet of the Bush administration, belongs to all. Until recently Bush and his administration have done virtually nothing to improve our steadily deteriorating economic foundation and it can be convincingly argued that he has hastened the erosion. However, in the end, it is the general tone and expectations of our population, egged on by politicians and fools of both parties, who, for over 60 years has generated the conditions that we now find ourselves in.
The Great Depression of the 1930's "cured" by the demands and sacrifices, in blood and treasure, of World War II, provided a pent up demand that propelled this country forward into the 1960's. As the natural momentum slowed the Republicans amplified their preaching of free enterprise and the Democrats, supposedly echoing Franklin D. Roosevelt, urged programs that would "take care of the little guy." But, in the era of the great depression that was not only what Roosevelt was trying to do. Roosevelt was desperately trying to right the economic foundations of this country, a foundation built on excesses, that had crumbled.
It is interesting to find that it is now a Republican administration that is attempting to do the same thing and using tools that were first developed in the Roosevelt administration. I do not believe that Bush is leading this effort. In fact, I have not read or heard him say anything that indicates that he even recognizes or comprehends the fundamentals of what has transpired and what the possible ramifications are.
For perhaps different reasons neither of the two candidates for president or their running mates have given any indication that they are intellectually invested in the dilemma other than to toss blame.
Out on a limb, indeed very far out on a limb, is Secretary of the Treasury Henry Paulson. Paulson, who came to government after running Goldman Sachs, the free market, capitalistic giant of Wall Street, is wielding a large club and banging around the vested interests of this era’s financial excesses. He is, using long standing powers, that are vested in his position, as well as new powers recently voted by congress, to take steps that are unprecedented since Roosevelt declared a four day bank "holiday" in 1933.
First, a year ago, he took great liberty with his powers and forced the teetering Bear, Stearns, a Wall Street firm that was a perfect model of a traders and, bare knuckled , risk takers. A firm that believed "the market price, is the market price" showing no mercy, to those on the other side of a bad bet, and forced them to eat their own cake. He forced them to sell themselves to J. P. Morgan, Chase at a pittance. He did this as Bear had made tremendous bets on the mortgage market "securities" that, as the housing bubble burst, were anything but secure.
Helping the housing boom, supported by Democrats and Republicans alike, was the creation of two companies, whose roots are historically tied to the Roosevelt era, that came to be called Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac. They were odd hybrids. Each was chartered as private, publicly traded corporations and were labeled Government Sponsored Entities. Their charter was for them to buy mortgages placed by banks, combine them into other forms of securities and sell those securities to all comers. Thus, they continuously replenished the originating banks capital creating a rolling snowball of revolving money with everyone involved taking fees. The Democrats looked at these GSE’s as a way to promote home ownership for the lower end of the middle class and the Republicans looked at them as engines of infinite liquidity and profit for all. The buyers of the securities issued by the GSE’s, banks, foreign and domestic, foreign government sovereign funds, etc. considered the investments to be implicitly backed by the United States government but nowhere did the securities that the Fannie’s issued state that they had the "full faith and backing" of our government. Still, the Fannie’s sold, or guaranteed, in the neighborhood of at least $ 5 trillion of paper.
Alas, some of the ultimate mortgages that backed the Fannie’s paper, in total fully one half of all mortgages in place in this country, started to sink rapidly in value as those who had been urged to buy homes, that they really could not afford, with mortgages that should never have been written, fell into foreclosure. All of a sudden the buyers of Fannie paper, the banks of Europe, China, Russia, etc. got very nervous. Paulson, fully realizing that a collapse of the Fannie’s could lead to a worldwide financial freeze up, not so different to the Great Depression, took government control of the Fannie’s using a conservatorship. Call it a gentle form of bankruptcy without using the word.
Economists have estimated that in the end this debacle may cost us taxpayers some $100 billion to cover the rotten paper. If it works, it will be cheap.
What we must think about is what will happen if it does not work. And on the brighter side, what can we do to stop it from happening again.
At the same time I think the whole mess deserves serious thought by the general public. Unfortunately this is wishful thinking.
Our economy, which the Democrats try to lay at the feet of the Bush administration, belongs to all. Until recently Bush and his administration have done virtually nothing to improve our steadily deteriorating economic foundation and it can be convincingly argued that he has hastened the erosion. However, in the end, it is the general tone and expectations of our population, egged on by politicians and fools of both parties, who, for over 60 years has generated the conditions that we now find ourselves in.
The Great Depression of the 1930's "cured" by the demands and sacrifices, in blood and treasure, of World War II, provided a pent up demand that propelled this country forward into the 1960's. As the natural momentum slowed the Republicans amplified their preaching of free enterprise and the Democrats, supposedly echoing Franklin D. Roosevelt, urged programs that would "take care of the little guy." But, in the era of the great depression that was not only what Roosevelt was trying to do. Roosevelt was desperately trying to right the economic foundations of this country, a foundation built on excesses, that had crumbled.
It is interesting to find that it is now a Republican administration that is attempting to do the same thing and using tools that were first developed in the Roosevelt administration. I do not believe that Bush is leading this effort. In fact, I have not read or heard him say anything that indicates that he even recognizes or comprehends the fundamentals of what has transpired and what the possible ramifications are.
For perhaps different reasons neither of the two candidates for president or their running mates have given any indication that they are intellectually invested in the dilemma other than to toss blame.
Out on a limb, indeed very far out on a limb, is Secretary of the Treasury Henry Paulson. Paulson, who came to government after running Goldman Sachs, the free market, capitalistic giant of Wall Street, is wielding a large club and banging around the vested interests of this era’s financial excesses. He is, using long standing powers, that are vested in his position, as well as new powers recently voted by congress, to take steps that are unprecedented since Roosevelt declared a four day bank "holiday" in 1933.
First, a year ago, he took great liberty with his powers and forced the teetering Bear, Stearns, a Wall Street firm that was a perfect model of a traders and, bare knuckled , risk takers. A firm that believed "the market price, is the market price" showing no mercy, to those on the other side of a bad bet, and forced them to eat their own cake. He forced them to sell themselves to J. P. Morgan, Chase at a pittance. He did this as Bear had made tremendous bets on the mortgage market "securities" that, as the housing bubble burst, were anything but secure.
Helping the housing boom, supported by Democrats and Republicans alike, was the creation of two companies, whose roots are historically tied to the Roosevelt era, that came to be called Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac. They were odd hybrids. Each was chartered as private, publicly traded corporations and were labeled Government Sponsored Entities. Their charter was for them to buy mortgages placed by banks, combine them into other forms of securities and sell those securities to all comers. Thus, they continuously replenished the originating banks capital creating a rolling snowball of revolving money with everyone involved taking fees. The Democrats looked at these GSE’s as a way to promote home ownership for the lower end of the middle class and the Republicans looked at them as engines of infinite liquidity and profit for all. The buyers of the securities issued by the GSE’s, banks, foreign and domestic, foreign government sovereign funds, etc. considered the investments to be implicitly backed by the United States government but nowhere did the securities that the Fannie’s issued state that they had the "full faith and backing" of our government. Still, the Fannie’s sold, or guaranteed, in the neighborhood of at least $ 5 trillion of paper.
Alas, some of the ultimate mortgages that backed the Fannie’s paper, in total fully one half of all mortgages in place in this country, started to sink rapidly in value as those who had been urged to buy homes, that they really could not afford, with mortgages that should never have been written, fell into foreclosure. All of a sudden the buyers of Fannie paper, the banks of Europe, China, Russia, etc. got very nervous. Paulson, fully realizing that a collapse of the Fannie’s could lead to a worldwide financial freeze up, not so different to the Great Depression, took government control of the Fannie’s using a conservatorship. Call it a gentle form of bankruptcy without using the word.
Economists have estimated that in the end this debacle may cost us taxpayers some $100 billion to cover the rotten paper. If it works, it will be cheap.
What we must think about is what will happen if it does not work. And on the brighter side, what can we do to stop it from happening again.
Wednesday, September 3, 2008
Speak loudly and forget the stick ------------
The following link of an in depth commentary by Robert Kagan, from the August 30 - 31, 2008, Wall Street Journal is very informative whether one agrees with all of it or none or if you sit somewhere in between. Kagan is very well informed and presents concisely.
(http://s.wsj.net/article/SB122005366593885103.html)
It is especially appropriate with Vice President Cheney traveling in the Caucasus and to the various "stans." In Georgia he is announcing a $1 billion dollar contribution for rebuilding after it was thrashed by Russia for attacking and entering the breakaway South Ossetia region.
I will dig into this further at a later date but I do suggest that the graphed data in the article is compelling
(http://s.wsj.net/article/SB122005366593885103.html)
It is especially appropriate with Vice President Cheney traveling in the Caucasus and to the various "stans." In Georgia he is announcing a $1 billion dollar contribution for rebuilding after it was thrashed by Russia for attacking and entering the breakaway South Ossetia region.
I will dig into this further at a later date but I do suggest that the graphed data in the article is compelling
Tuesday, September 2, 2008
Democrats and Republicans and bi - partisan blunders
In 1952, at 16 years of age, while working on a small farm in the Borscht Belt of upstate New York, I joined the farmer and his family in front of their TV set, watching large portions of both the Democratic and Republican presidential nominating conventions. It was televisions first full time and elaborate convention coverage and the last time that multiple ballots were needed to select the nominee. Unlike today, going in there was no ruling primary system and hence no "presumptive nominee." The outcome of neither convention was locked in before they started.
In between haying, weeding strawberries and hilling potatoes we watched the contentious drama for hours. It was exciting and boring but it was estimated, both before and afterwards (by Popular Mechanics, the networks and Scientific American) that some 75 million Americans, watching on 16 million TV sets, would overcome the boredom and watch. It was further estimated that folks spent a total of 10 hours a piece watching the conventions.
This year I have watched none of the Democratic Convention, that attracted 40 million viewers for Senator Obama’s coronation speech, live, though I have watched a good number of the featured speakers on MSNBC video clips. After watching the speeches, using You Tube, I flashed back to other times checking out the campaigns of Hubert Humphrey, Adlai Stevenson, Harry Truman, John Kennedy, LBJ, Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, etc.. I compared their "performances" to the eloquence to Barack Obama’s and shuddered.
Mr. Obama, who had been selling "change you can believe in,"segued at the convention to "change we need," far outclassed his predecessors in his presentation of what he has stated he will deliver to the people of this country. However, other than allowing for the drift of events over time, he was very much in synch with the empty rhetoric of the past. So why did I shudder? Simply because the change he was selling has always been and will always be a mythical dream and he has sold the pig in a poke better and created more believers assured to be disappointed and who will look for somebody othr than temselves to blame.
There is no heaven on earth. Instead there is cold reality based upon human nature shaped and shifted by time. A realistic approach acknowledging the limits of what government can and cannot do is required for our nation to survive in a form that hews to it’s basic principles. Having the ability to convince millions of people that there is a way to willfully change the cards that have been dealt, by time and events, in search of the myth, leads to actions and legislation by the leaders that not only will fail to work but that always lead to unintended consequences that can be worse than the unrealistic intended gain. Just look at how the push to make purchasing a home available to those who simply could not afford it has devastated our financial systems over the last year.
Can this nation be better governed – no question, always. But we should not be embarking on a quest for the impossible, an expensive quest when we are all ready well overdrawn at the bank. Lowering taxes on the middle class and attempting to recoup the money from the rich is rhetoric. Adjusting taxes in a more equitable manner, what ever that is, always makes sense.
But nothing is as infuriating as knowing that ones earnings are being taken in taxes to pay for programs and costs for others, who are unable or unwilling to work at the same level of physical or mental stress that the over achievers accept.
Certainly we must realize that those who are unable to reach a bare minimum subsistence must be allowed for. However, public programs that are ostensibly inclined to propel those not inclined or equipped to share the full load, always tend to attract those looking for a way to thrive at no cost to themselves. Every system designed by man to ostensibly level the playing field based upon the idea that all will work shoulder to shoulder and equally carry the load has failed. Not because of those who simply were not up to it but always because of those who chose to get by doing the least.
Without bothering to compare the philosophy of the Soviet collectives, simply looking at the Israeli kibbutz and the 1970's communes of America, are example enough. These supposedly utopian arrangements, where all would pull together for the common good and equal return did not work as intended because people are people.
To me the Democratic rhetoric, as exquisitely presented by Mr. Obama, is really a dream for the entire body of the United States to be shaped into a mythical commune. Certainly many things in the public sector need attention. Our healthcare system and costs are overwhelming. Medicare works very well for the elderly, but that system, extended to the entire nation is beyond our means. Whether run by the government or the private markets delivering medical care for all, young and old, will be unsustainable if we continue the present form that seeks eternal life, for all, as a right.
Another army of teachers will not improve reading scores as much as "no child left behind" has. The desired end point is more closely tied to the family and individual motivation. Unfortunately how to deliver that elusive motivation is beyond governments capability and any government that thinks they can legislate that critical component leads it’s people down a yellow brick road.
After Mr. Obama’s performance I was very anxious to see Mr. McCain’s VP choice set for Friday. When it was announced I dug into the net to find out what was available concerning the background and experience of the Governor of Alaska, Sarah Palin.
After reviewing the information I was aghast. With subsequent announcements the selection has proved closer to a soap opera then reality TV. A last minute, inadequately vetted candidate, who , no matter how well intended she is not in anyway qualified to serve as Vice President behind a 72 year old president.
So I continue to shudder. Both of the candidates leave me uneasy. Mr. Obama, unqualified except for raw intellect and great communication skills is promising what cannot be delivered and Mr. McCain making a very poor choice for his VP throwing into question his skills in deliberative and careful decision making. A capability that we desperately need in the White House.
In between haying, weeding strawberries and hilling potatoes we watched the contentious drama for hours. It was exciting and boring but it was estimated, both before and afterwards (by Popular Mechanics, the networks and Scientific American) that some 75 million Americans, watching on 16 million TV sets, would overcome the boredom and watch. It was further estimated that folks spent a total of 10 hours a piece watching the conventions.
This year I have watched none of the Democratic Convention, that attracted 40 million viewers for Senator Obama’s coronation speech, live, though I have watched a good number of the featured speakers on MSNBC video clips. After watching the speeches, using You Tube, I flashed back to other times checking out the campaigns of Hubert Humphrey, Adlai Stevenson, Harry Truman, John Kennedy, LBJ, Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, etc.. I compared their "performances" to the eloquence to Barack Obama’s and shuddered.
Mr. Obama, who had been selling "change you can believe in,"segued at the convention to "change we need," far outclassed his predecessors in his presentation of what he has stated he will deliver to the people of this country. However, other than allowing for the drift of events over time, he was very much in synch with the empty rhetoric of the past. So why did I shudder? Simply because the change he was selling has always been and will always be a mythical dream and he has sold the pig in a poke better and created more believers assured to be disappointed and who will look for somebody othr than temselves to blame.
There is no heaven on earth. Instead there is cold reality based upon human nature shaped and shifted by time. A realistic approach acknowledging the limits of what government can and cannot do is required for our nation to survive in a form that hews to it’s basic principles. Having the ability to convince millions of people that there is a way to willfully change the cards that have been dealt, by time and events, in search of the myth, leads to actions and legislation by the leaders that not only will fail to work but that always lead to unintended consequences that can be worse than the unrealistic intended gain. Just look at how the push to make purchasing a home available to those who simply could not afford it has devastated our financial systems over the last year.
Can this nation be better governed – no question, always. But we should not be embarking on a quest for the impossible, an expensive quest when we are all ready well overdrawn at the bank. Lowering taxes on the middle class and attempting to recoup the money from the rich is rhetoric. Adjusting taxes in a more equitable manner, what ever that is, always makes sense.
But nothing is as infuriating as knowing that ones earnings are being taken in taxes to pay for programs and costs for others, who are unable or unwilling to work at the same level of physical or mental stress that the over achievers accept.
Certainly we must realize that those who are unable to reach a bare minimum subsistence must be allowed for. However, public programs that are ostensibly inclined to propel those not inclined or equipped to share the full load, always tend to attract those looking for a way to thrive at no cost to themselves. Every system designed by man to ostensibly level the playing field based upon the idea that all will work shoulder to shoulder and equally carry the load has failed. Not because of those who simply were not up to it but always because of those who chose to get by doing the least.
Without bothering to compare the philosophy of the Soviet collectives, simply looking at the Israeli kibbutz and the 1970's communes of America, are example enough. These supposedly utopian arrangements, where all would pull together for the common good and equal return did not work as intended because people are people.
To me the Democratic rhetoric, as exquisitely presented by Mr. Obama, is really a dream for the entire body of the United States to be shaped into a mythical commune. Certainly many things in the public sector need attention. Our healthcare system and costs are overwhelming. Medicare works very well for the elderly, but that system, extended to the entire nation is beyond our means. Whether run by the government or the private markets delivering medical care for all, young and old, will be unsustainable if we continue the present form that seeks eternal life, for all, as a right.
Another army of teachers will not improve reading scores as much as "no child left behind" has. The desired end point is more closely tied to the family and individual motivation. Unfortunately how to deliver that elusive motivation is beyond governments capability and any government that thinks they can legislate that critical component leads it’s people down a yellow brick road.
After Mr. Obama’s performance I was very anxious to see Mr. McCain’s VP choice set for Friday. When it was announced I dug into the net to find out what was available concerning the background and experience of the Governor of Alaska, Sarah Palin.
After reviewing the information I was aghast. With subsequent announcements the selection has proved closer to a soap opera then reality TV. A last minute, inadequately vetted candidate, who , no matter how well intended she is not in anyway qualified to serve as Vice President behind a 72 year old president.
So I continue to shudder. Both of the candidates leave me uneasy. Mr. Obama, unqualified except for raw intellect and great communication skills is promising what cannot be delivered and Mr. McCain making a very poor choice for his VP throwing into question his skills in deliberative and careful decision making. A capability that we desperately need in the White House.
Tuesday, August 26, 2008
"Know when to hold them"
In the old Kenny Rodgers song he sang about the gambler who cautioned that, "you got to know when to hold them and know when to fold them," sound advice.
If you look at life in a grand perspective, we make bets all the time. We bet on our futures when we chose whether to get an education, what sort of sports to play, choosing our diet, marrying for money or looks, etc. Most of us do not look at these natural choices as a bet but in the long run they can be seen to be just that. How boring it would be if we all were trained, or programmed by genes, to weigh every action in life to pick the best odds for each decision. It is also impossible because, as we all know, the set of facts for yesterday may be radically different today. Today’s bet may be a sure shot by next week, as the world turns, or it could cloud future actions going forward.
While it would be boring to rule our individual lives by statistical likelihood and seasoned logic, not so for international affairs. Too many administrations have made bets that effect all of the American people and because of our country’s dominant position, millions of others in the world. Early isolationism let Hitler inflict world wide horror and pain on millions. His intentions were known, his mass murders were apparent long before the spine of the "free" world stiffened. Churchill’s foresight and determination to avoid what was coming, his ability to convince and gain support of Roosevelt was all part of a calculated, hard decision, a big bet, that won the jackpot of relative world peace since 1945.
Today, I am concerned that recent bets by individuals, corporations, world leaders and especially those that are ideologically driven, has stacked the deck against a continuance of our always fragile peaceful existence.
The situation with Russia and Georgia, in the Caucasus is a prime example of laying down a bet that seemed a no - brainer and unfortunately turned out to truly be a no - brainer on the stupid side. Thomas Friedman, multiple Pulitzer Prize winning author and op - ed columnist for the New York Times discussed the expansion of NATO into what Russia calls the "near abroad", (meaning "in my back yard" ). I find Friedman world class when he sticks to the Middle east and international affairs and an unrealistic gadfly when he preaches on environmental issues. However, on the expansion of NATO and the encroachment on traditional Russian spheres of influence he pegged the Clint administration and the Bush administration for leading us down a risky, no win, path for 16 years.
Friedman, to his credit, does take chances by going on record early. He has written extensively on Lebanon and the on going turmoil surrounding Israel and the entire Middle East. A strong, traditional voice for people to get along he also displays his biases as when he supported the Bush reasoning on Iraq , hung in there as things went askew and then tried to slip a fair share of accountability on the subject as things soured.
However, now when it comes to Georgia and the poorly evaluated decision to have NATO creep up on Russia he is sticking to his early analysis that warned against the strategy. Good for him.
In hindsight one can see how the initial Clinton "bet" was wrong. But it seemed so logical. The USSR was dead, new Russia was on it’s knees, what could seem simpler then urging the non core Russian appendages to declare their independence and for us to jump in and to push western enterprises to lock up the gas oil and other plentiful natural resources while we looked for military bases giving us a leg up if the USSR tried to rebuild itself. To the East all the "stans" broke loose, though none has taken on the glow of Democracy predicted for them. Autocrats and sons of autocrats still hold power and use it to maintain strict internal control. In the West we jumped to have all the Baltic states, all of whom were not unhappy with Hitler, to peel out and they are now in NATO. Russia who had loaded up those countries with Russians during the Cold War, seethed. In the Balkans we were happy to see Yugoslavia explode into it’s previous ungovernable pieces. We used NATO to stop the ethnic cleansing, genetically wired into the citizens of that area as well as the Caucasus and then supported a sanitized ethnic cleansing letting the Albanian majority in Kosovo kill or chase out the significant number of Serbs who called it home.
Again and still, Russia seethed.
Now, our administration and NATO has reacted with alarm after their pet model Georgia, a fractured democracy at best aroused the Russian bear who effectively and swiftly made jam out of the Georgian peach. Now, Russia has announced it recognizes the independence of the two breakaway Georgian provinces, South Ossetia and Abkhazia that were not historically part of Georgia. The US and the European Union or at least NATO is mouthing off.
We dealt ourselves a bad hand.
It was an ill considered bet. It is time to "fold" and to try and cuddle up to the bear with dignity.
If you look at life in a grand perspective, we make bets all the time. We bet on our futures when we chose whether to get an education, what sort of sports to play, choosing our diet, marrying for money or looks, etc. Most of us do not look at these natural choices as a bet but in the long run they can be seen to be just that. How boring it would be if we all were trained, or programmed by genes, to weigh every action in life to pick the best odds for each decision. It is also impossible because, as we all know, the set of facts for yesterday may be radically different today. Today’s bet may be a sure shot by next week, as the world turns, or it could cloud future actions going forward.
While it would be boring to rule our individual lives by statistical likelihood and seasoned logic, not so for international affairs. Too many administrations have made bets that effect all of the American people and because of our country’s dominant position, millions of others in the world. Early isolationism let Hitler inflict world wide horror and pain on millions. His intentions were known, his mass murders were apparent long before the spine of the "free" world stiffened. Churchill’s foresight and determination to avoid what was coming, his ability to convince and gain support of Roosevelt was all part of a calculated, hard decision, a big bet, that won the jackpot of relative world peace since 1945.
Today, I am concerned that recent bets by individuals, corporations, world leaders and especially those that are ideologically driven, has stacked the deck against a continuance of our always fragile peaceful existence.
The situation with Russia and Georgia, in the Caucasus is a prime example of laying down a bet that seemed a no - brainer and unfortunately turned out to truly be a no - brainer on the stupid side. Thomas Friedman, multiple Pulitzer Prize winning author and op - ed columnist for the New York Times discussed the expansion of NATO into what Russia calls the "near abroad", (meaning "in my back yard" ). I find Friedman world class when he sticks to the Middle east and international affairs and an unrealistic gadfly when he preaches on environmental issues. However, on the expansion of NATO and the encroachment on traditional Russian spheres of influence he pegged the Clint administration and the Bush administration for leading us down a risky, no win, path for 16 years.
Friedman, to his credit, does take chances by going on record early. He has written extensively on Lebanon and the on going turmoil surrounding Israel and the entire Middle East. A strong, traditional voice for people to get along he also displays his biases as when he supported the Bush reasoning on Iraq , hung in there as things went askew and then tried to slip a fair share of accountability on the subject as things soured.
However, now when it comes to Georgia and the poorly evaluated decision to have NATO creep up on Russia he is sticking to his early analysis that warned against the strategy. Good for him.
In hindsight one can see how the initial Clinton "bet" was wrong. But it seemed so logical. The USSR was dead, new Russia was on it’s knees, what could seem simpler then urging the non core Russian appendages to declare their independence and for us to jump in and to push western enterprises to lock up the gas oil and other plentiful natural resources while we looked for military bases giving us a leg up if the USSR tried to rebuild itself. To the East all the "stans" broke loose, though none has taken on the glow of Democracy predicted for them. Autocrats and sons of autocrats still hold power and use it to maintain strict internal control. In the West we jumped to have all the Baltic states, all of whom were not unhappy with Hitler, to peel out and they are now in NATO. Russia who had loaded up those countries with Russians during the Cold War, seethed. In the Balkans we were happy to see Yugoslavia explode into it’s previous ungovernable pieces. We used NATO to stop the ethnic cleansing, genetically wired into the citizens of that area as well as the Caucasus and then supported a sanitized ethnic cleansing letting the Albanian majority in Kosovo kill or chase out the significant number of Serbs who called it home.
Again and still, Russia seethed.
Now, our administration and NATO has reacted with alarm after their pet model Georgia, a fractured democracy at best aroused the Russian bear who effectively and swiftly made jam out of the Georgian peach. Now, Russia has announced it recognizes the independence of the two breakaway Georgian provinces, South Ossetia and Abkhazia that were not historically part of Georgia. The US and the European Union or at least NATO is mouthing off.
We dealt ourselves a bad hand.
It was an ill considered bet. It is time to "fold" and to try and cuddle up to the bear with dignity.
Thursday, August 21, 2008
Who will he ask to the prom?
Senator Obama’s staff was quick to bridle at Senator McCain’s playful ad, the one with shots of vacuous celebrities Britney Spears and Paris Hilton, an ad that asked if Mr. Obama was a celebrity or somebody ready to lead.The Obama crew claimed it was adolescent high school humor. In a sense it was but it was worth a chuckle and made a valid point.
However, the Obama complaint proves shallow undermined by the high school intrigue and gossip game of, "who will Mr. Obama pick for his VP?" Can he nominate a woman if it is not Hillary? Will the team like each other and "accentuate the positive and eliminate the negative." (Thank you, Johnny Mercer.)
This is a very serious question. But the question should be not who he wants to date, but why. Will his VP be expected to do a take off from Vice President Cheney’s role as deputy president or will it be someone who fly’s hither and yon to funerals and coronations?
We will all quickly ask that question.
And who will Mr. McCain chose? I would like him to show a different level of maturity and name his VP seconds after Obama name his true flame. If it is a good pick. Tim Pawlenty -- who?????
VP’s or failed VP candidates of the not so distant past are usually not even remembered. Some we try to forget. Many of them came from nowhere and quickly go back to where they came from.
VP’s or failed VP candidates of the not so distant past are usually not even remembered. Some we try to forget. Many of them came from nowhere and quickly go back to where they came from.
Does any one remember Barry Goldwater’s choice in 1964, an obscure upstate New York congressman that nobody heard of before he was nominated or after. A solid citizen, William Miller, the failed candidate, was one of the the first face "celebrities" used by the American Express card ad that asked, "Do you know me?"
Nobody did even after he ran.
So Saturday will be the big day for Obamanics. A real life edition of "Survivor" with probably just as much lasting meaning.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)